1 / 17

Safety Forum 2016 Brussels, 07 - 08 June 2016

Airborne and Ground Based Safety Nets make a positive difference in ATM Safety - Application in Real Time Operations & Operational Monitoring. Ground Based SAFNET for Operational Monitoring Identifying positive deviance - Safety performance monitoring. Safety Forum 2016

jaysony
Download Presentation

Safety Forum 2016 Brussels, 07 - 08 June 2016

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Airborne and Ground Based Safety Nets make a positive difference in ATM Safety - Application in Real Time Operations & Operational Monitoring Ground Based SAFNET for Operational MonitoringIdentifying positive deviance - Safety performance monitoring Safety Forum 2016 Brussels, 07 - 08 June 2016 Dr. Frederic Lieutaud ASMT Project Manager EUROCONTROL Tony Licu Head of Safety Unit EURCONTROL Marco Ducci Carlo Valbonesi ASMT ECTL Ext. Operations Support ENAV Safety Team ASMT User ENAV Spa

  2. Airborne Safety Netsmake positive difference in ATM safety Ground Based Real-time Operations Operational Expertise • Interpret the results • Implement actions • OperationalMonitoring • Best practices (Safety II) • Systemic issues (Safety I) ASMT Automatic Safety MonitoringTool • Drawn attention • Drive analysis/questions

  3. The Positive Deviance Approach

  4. Baseline performance

  5. Baseline performance

  6. Positive Outliers

  7. Baseline performance

  8. Outliers by Traffic Load

  9. Baseline performance

  10. Outliers by Vertical movements

  11. Baseline performance

  12. Negative Outliers

  13. Outliersoverview Betterthanexpected: which are the drivers? Intervene on airspace design: reduce vertmovements? Worsethanexpected: which are the causes? Intervene on trafficload: reduce traffic?

  14. Positive Outliers

  15. Positive outliers – the Rome FIR case

  16. Analysis of outliers: what can we learn? Betterthanexpected: which are the drivers? Specificproceduresused to avoidconflicts in transitionareas Worsethanexpected: which are the causes? A non-optimaltuning of the STCA? Non-optimal ATC procedures?

  17. Conclusion and what’s next? • The Positive Deviance Approach relies on operational data and use of ASMT to perform Outliers analysis and make difference in: • Understanding how operations work as a whole • Measuring and assessing the presence of safety, performing better or worse than the average: • capture best practices to reproduce (Safety II), as opposed to • identify systemic issues to be mitigated (Safety I) • Italian airspace STCA analysis is only an example - future studies in ATM safety using SAFNET data and ASMT in the pipeline: • Correlation of Safety Events (STCA/SMI/ACAS-RA) & Traffic Metrics • Analyses of Hotspot of false/nuisance SAFNET events for tuning & performance monitoring • Analyses of correlation of RIMCAS alerts and Go-around/Missed Approach (expanding on aerodrome design and procedures)

More Related